AuthorTopic: Dershowitz on Israel (Read 7343 times)

Maybe some editing would make your post easier to follow. The idea that it is just as easy to say the U.S is appeasing Israel as it is to say most in the West are appeasing Hezbollah/Iran is absurd. If you would like to expand that arguement I would love to hear it.The fact is, the U.N. has passed resolutions to have Lebanon clean up the south and they were ignored like every other U.N. resolution. So it is only the method that people disagree on. The U.N. tends to like empty rhetoric and weak promises. Israelis trying to protect their citizens prefer more productive measures.

My point was that everyone wanted to appease in WW2, except Churchill and a few others. Therefore, the arguement that US is the only supporter of Israel, and that that implies something wrong is ridiculous. I believe you help make my point. Nor am I an advocate/mouthpiece for a political party, and your attack against me assumed that I was. I do think we take a hardline with Iran and/or Syria just to gain credibility back so our threats have some effect and people are not so inclined to pick a fight with us. Pulling out of Beirut in '83 and Mogadishu in '93 showed we lacked the resolve to deal with a tough situation. Strength was Bush's one redeeming characteristic until his recent neutering and the resulting lack of will the last year or so.

So far you have said that those who do not agree with you are ignorant, racist, blindly patriotic, stupid, and their opinions are worth less because their school is "ranked" lower. Think about why that is...

As far as world opinion, alot of people were behind Neville Chamberlain and were criticizing Churchill and we see how that worked out.

Maybe some editing would make your post easier to follow. The idea that it is just as easy to say the U.S is appeasing Israel as it is to say most in the West are appeasing Hezbollah/Iran is absurd. If you would like to expand that arguement I would love to hear it.The fact is, the U.N. has passed resolutions to have Lebanon clean up the south and they were ignored like every other U.N. resolution. So it is only the method that people disagree on. The U.N. tends to like empty rhetoric and weak promises. Israelis trying to protect their citizens prefer more productive measures.

unilateralism rules!!!

and along the lines of this logic, iran is justified, in order to be "more productive", of course, to ignore the UN and develop nuclear weapons? note the inconsistency

Also, I want the "I like Jews but hate Zionism" argument clarified, because CLEARLY from the Iranian president's statements, found in all kinds of places, they amount to the same thing: frequent Holocaust denial and the call for the complete destruction of the Israeli state. Again: no two-state solution, no longterm peace, just the destruction of the largest Jewish population in the world.

when dealing with the ignorant, there are two options: you can educate them, or you can ignore them.in this case i choose the latter.get a clue. and learn to stop exaggerating and twisting peoples words around.ps ahmadinejad didnt deny the holocaust, he said it was "elevated to mythlike status". which is true bc everytime you criticise an israeli they pull out the holocaust card. thats the point he was trying to make.40 million russians died under stalin, systematically and capriciously. you dont hear them whining and using it as an excuse to exonerate their human rights abuses nowadays.

That is why Iran will ignore them and develop nukes, I will not argue that it is to their advantage to have them. The difference between us is, I do not see Iran's "productivity" as morally equivalent to Israels. Not inconsistent. I understand why they want to, I just do not support what they are going for nor will I agree that it is morally equivalent to Israels goal.

That is why Iran will ignore them and develop nukes, I will not argue that it is to their advantage to have them. The difference between us is, I do not see Iran's "productivity" as morally equivalent to Israels. Not inconsistent. I understand why they want to, I just do not support what they are going for nor will I agree that it is morally equivalent to Israels goal.

I was not comparing moral equivalence. i was implying that unilateralism and disregard for international law and order sets a dangerous precedent. for example, when a country, like oh i dont know, the US in 2003, or israel this year, defies the wishes and regulations of the international community and goes on a unilateral rampage, its kind of hard for other countries to look at that precedent and still abide by the same set of rules.you cannot expect a "do-as-i-say-not-as-i-do" foreign policy to have any legitimacy in todays world.

Also, I want the "I like Jews but hate Zionism" argument clarified, because CLEARLY from the Iranian president's statements, found in all kinds of places, they amount to the same thing: frequent Holocaust denial and the call for the complete destruction of the Israeli state. Again: no two-state solution, no longterm peace, just the destruction of the largest Jewish population in the world.

when dealing with the ignorant, there are two options: you can educate them, or you can ignore them.in this case i choose the latter.get a clue. and learn to stop exaggerating and twisting peoples words around.ps ahmadinejad didnt deny the holocaust, he said it was "elevated to mythlike status". which is true bc everytime you criticise an israeli they pull out the holocaust card. thats the point he was trying to make.40 million russians died under stalin, systematically and capriciously. you dont hear them whining and using it as an excuse to exonerate their human rights abuses nowadays.

Your analogy is flawed, Stalin was a Russian. What are they going to say, we abused ourselves so we can abuse others?

Also, I want the "I like Jews but hate Zionism" argument clarified, because CLEARLY from the Iranian president's statements, found in all kinds of places, they amount to the same thing: frequent Holocaust denial and the call for the complete destruction of the Israeli state. Again: no two-state solution, no longterm peace, just the destruction of the largest Jewish population in the world.

when dealing with the ignorant, there are two options: you can educate them, or you can ignore them.in this case i choose the latter.get a clue. and learn to stop exaggerating and twisting peoples words around.ps ahmadinejad didnt deny the holocaust, he said it was "elevated to mythlike status". which is true bc everytime you criticise an israeli they pull out the holocaust card. thats the point he was trying to make.40 million russians died under stalin, systematically and capriciously. you dont hear them whining and using it as an excuse to exonerate their human rights abuses nowadays.

Your analogy is flawed, Stalin was a Russian. What are they going to say, we abused ourselves so we can abuse others?

I promised myself I wasn't going to enter this thread, and certainly not to validate one of Boughetto's arguments, but this is an entirely specious criticism, Freak. Stalinist political repression was incredibly brutal and widespread; that it was explicitly political more than it was explicitly racial-ethnic or religious hardly matters.

Also, neither of you means "Russian." For one, Stalin was Georgian. But more important, while there were plenty of Russian victims under Stalin, millions of the deported and killed were removed precisely because of their ethnic/national background (even if they were Soviet citizens).

There are countless meaningful distinctions between Stalin and Hitler, and between the responses of their survivors and the descendants of their victims. This isn't one of them.

It does matter, the Russians (soviet union if you wish, what are we going to pick Israeli tribes next?), fought amongst themselves. The tribe of Benjamin was nearly whipped out by some of the other tribes. The Hutus and Tutsis experienced something similar, though they're not as closely related as Israeli tribes. Neither justify a touchy approach to other nations.

Israel has a very valid defense because as recently as 1940ish outside forces attempted to eliminate them. Remember Israel wasn't a nation then. The Holocaust was unique in the history of the world. So was the Stalin regime, and it was worse than the Holocaust by far, but very different.

Israel has been attacked time and again with intent to either destroy them totally or whipe them off the map. If they are paranoid, nobody has a right to blame them, especially given their enemies rhetoric and actions. Maybe it's hard to understand what it's like to be taught to hate another race, but generations after generations of children are taught to hate Jews. Israel is not in a game, they can't just experiment, if they mess up they're all dead, absent another Red Sea.